The Knights Templar connection to Oak Island Challenge

[treasure1822]

The renewal has to do with the Templar's renewing them self under the a secret order know as the Freemasons. And no has given their rendition on the meaning of the stone carving, or why the Mikmaq Indians just happened to play a ancient Scottish game called "Shinty", known today as lacrosse. Let me guess,you believe that the "Overton Stone" truly is a contract Portuguese masons and the Mikmaq Indians but no explanation of the symbols. How about the Westford Knight or the Boat Stone. Why is there a stone on Oak Island that has the letter "G" boarded by a square that was unearthed by Dan Blankenship when he was bulldozing near the cave-in pit. The fact is you have no idea why, you don't want to admit that the theories are plausible.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[treasure1822]

Your idea of "Legitimate" academic sources told us at one time there were no giant squids and the world was flat not to mention the the earth was the center of the universe. The proof will come, what is needed is open mindedness, that is where advancement is made.

 

[treasure1822]

Because it seems sensible to disallow certain groups: such as Martians, Namibian Pygmies, orangutans and other such categories for lack of evidence of their appearance or activity in North America, or more specifically on Oak Island.

But I will revise that as physical evidence surfaces.

I don't believe anyone has made the claim of these things being on Oak Island so I question why you would use them as examples...My question still stands, how do you know why it has nothing to do with Oak Island?

 

[ECS]

Another on the strawman hayride to the red herring fishfry.
Flat Earth and giant squids have nothing to do with the Templars or Oak Island, and are poor examples to support your statements.
PS: Ouroboros was a "SINGLE" snake biting its own tail, not a series of dragons chasing around a column as a decoration.
You do see the fallacy in that statement you made on post #316, and is nothing more that force fitting that pillar decoration to fit a pet, but unfounded, theory.

 

[treasure1822]

Another on the strawman hayride to the red herring fishfry.
Flat Earth and giant squids have nothing to do with the Templars or Oak Island, and are poor examples to support your statements.
PS: Ouroboros was a "SINGLE" snake biting its own tail, not a series of dragons chasing around a column as a decoration.
You do see the fallacy in that statement you made on post #316, and is nothing more that force fitting that pillar decoration to fit a pet, but unfounded, theory.

Again you avoid...I didn't say that "Flat earth and Giant Squid had to do with Oak Island, it had to do with the idea of your "Legitimate Academic Sources" and you better take another look at the "Apprentice Pillar" it is not a rendition of dragon chasing each other. they are linked together as in a chain. As for unfounded, your claim to fame is denying everything until your "Legitimate Academic source" tells you what to think. Not capable of free thought?

 

[lokiblossom]

Because it seems sensible to disallow certain groups: such as Martians, Namibian Pygmies, orangutans and other such categories for lack of evidence of their appearance or activity in North America, or more specifically on Oak Island.

But I will revise that as physical evidence surfaces.

C'mon Charlie, even you know that is not a reasonable comparison, or don't you? Hmm, maybe you really don't!

Cheers, Loki

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Please give us your rendition of what they mean...or are you telling us that you don't know what they mean but know what they don't mean? Tell me this, on the "Apprentice Pillar" at the base is a series of dragons connected like links of a chain biting their own tails. What do they mean?

I'll take a shot. Perhaps the dragons represent the offspring of Loki (along with Hel, his daughter) in Niflheim at the base of the tree Yggdrasil from Norse mythology? I'd have to look at the rest of the pillar and see if there are other "borrowings" from Norse mythology.

The Norse are where the Scottish get their good looks from. ;-)

 

[Dave Rishar]

My bad, actually it was 25,000 in the Battle of Bannockburn. Edwards army consisted of 2000 Mounted Knight's and another 15,000 foot soldiers against Robert the Bruce's 500 mounted knight's and 7000 foot soldiers. Seems as though the edge was to Edward and yet the victory went to Robert the Bruce. It would appear that the "Quality" of soldier was no match for the "Quanity" which would lead me to believe that they were very well seasoned.

If you're basing that belief simply on a smaller force winning, you're vastly oversimplifying the issue.

Breaking down the battle for a better understanding of what happened and why would take a book, and I'm sure that books have indeed been written about it. It would also appear to be impossible, as we don't know exactly what happened. We don't know exactly how many troops were there, or of what type. We're not even sure where it happened. About the only thing that we can be reasonably certain of is who won. Be very cautious when attempting to determine the nature of the soldiers based on the outcome of a battle with so many unknowns.

As for Helen Nicholson, she forgot 4 words in her statement which make it true "There are no records that I could find of any French-speaking knights appearing in Scotland in the early decades of the 14th century in a country where French speakers would certainly be noticed."
But she does forget that the Templar Knights were not entirely comprised of the French. If I were in a foreign land I would probably op for the most effective communicator to handle the interaction, makes more sense.

So in your estimation, if Templars saved the Scots at Bannockburn, where did those Templars come from?

How do you know it has nothing to do with Oak Island?

Because you're talking about Templars.

Also, I still want to hear about those history books. Don't think that I've forgotten.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

I don't believe anyone has made the claim of these things being on Oak Island so I question why you would use them as examples...My question still stands, how do you know why it has nothing to do with Oak Island?

My reply stands on it's own as well. There is zero - not a scrap - none - nada - evidence of Templars in North America. Ever. At all. Zip. Bunko. Squat.

Does that register?

 

[ECS]

... As for unfounded, your claim to fame is denying everything until your "Legitimate Academic source" tells you what to think.
Not capable of free thought?

So far your "claim to fame" is to post speculative theories garnered from these pseudo Templar books by quasi historians as if they are fact, but I do thank you for providing these examples that prove what I have addressed.
What has caused you disdain for legitimate academics of history?
Are you of the unfounded belief that there has been a "conspiracy of suppression" of true history that only these pulp history writers are bringing forth to the public?
Do your mangled historical lore come from these books and cause you to ignore Dave Rishar's request of naming these books?
Yes I am very capable of free thought and know the difference between fact and fantasy.

 

[treasure1822]

My reply stands on it's own as well. There is zero - not a scrap - none - nada - evidence of Templars in North America. Ever. At all. Zip. Bunko. Squat.

Does that register?

Oh that registers quite well, but you forgot some words as well. "That i will accept". The people who carved these stone's, who were they?

 

[treasure1822]

Oh yes, I post "Speculative Theories" but that is the key "Theories" based on the stones carvings (Fact) and legends. No one can produce one "Artist", not one person has come forward and said "I know who created it". The best we get is some man from NS claiming the one "Must" have been a "Treaty" between the First Nation and the Portuguese. I assume your idea of "Legitimate" is the author presents his name with "Dr." in front of it, and in reality all they are doing is publishing their "Theory".
As for my sources of information, what does it matter. They would be accepted by a few in this group do to the fact they wouldn't be deemed as "Legitimate". The telling of history can be obscured to control the narrative, it is all in the person telling it. Basing a belief on what isn't there instead of what is isn't research. As I had stated before, at one time the earth being round and giant squids were fantasy.

 

[ECS]

... I assume your idea of "Legitimate" is the author presents his name with "Dr." in front of it, and in reality all they are doing is publishing their "Theory".
As for my sources of information, what does it matter.
They would be accepted by a few in this group do to the fact they wouldn't be deemed as "Legitimate".
The telling of history can be obscured to control the narrative, it is all in the person telling it...

The difference between history that is researched and proven with hard documented facts, and the fantasy "theories" that you seem to accept as truth.
The major difference has nothing to do with having "Dr" but the documentation of "facts" that are directly related to the subject discussed providing gravitas to the presentation; whereas the quasi pulp historians utilize unrelated circumstantial facts to subject matter as a because of this, maybe could be speculation is represented under the presumptive guise of being true.
Your obvious dislike of legitimate history academics reveals the fragility of the "sources" that accept as factual causing you to become highly defensive these gossamer pseudo alternative fantasy histories are questioned.
There is

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Oh that registers quite well, but you forgot some words as well. "That i will accept". The people who carved these stone's, who were they?

Which stone?

 

[treasure1822]

You seem to think that everything had to be documented. Why do you think there is very little known about the Templar Knight's after they escaped France...Could it be they just didn't "Document" their movements. As for the "unrelated circumstantial facts" how can you make that assumption without knowing. How do you know that those stones are not hard evidence? How do you know that within the legends of Glooscap, that the people with facial hair or blue eye's are not the Templar knight's? There is no fragility to my source nor do I become defensive it is merely knowing that you or a select few would not accept them do to they do not fit your parameters. Again I ask "Who Carved the Stones"?

 

[treasure1822]

Which stone?

The Norumbega Vinland Stone, The Overton Stone, The Westford Knight and the Westford Boat Stone.

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

None of which are on Oak Island.

Norumbega Stone - looks Norse. Whether authentic or not I cannot say. If Norse it would most probably predate the Templars.

Overton Stone - Do you mean the stone with runes found in Yarmouth? Again, Norse or someone trying to mimic Norse style. Or the stone with tourist grafitti (with the feather) that is modern?

Westford Knight - Massachusetts? Debatable whether natural or worked. Someone painted it to make it look more "knightly". Just looks like a rock scraped by glacial movement to me.

Westford Boat Stone - looks like a kids' doodle of a boat and an arrow. Someone bored and likely just for amusement. No indication it is any older than the local 19th century era farms in the region. Someone even started to date it "184. . ."

I don't doubt for a second that the Norse were on Newfoundland and Nova Scotia before 1,000 AD. No question. There are two settlements - one define one pretty convincing. Because they left evidence that can be analyzed and dated.

The Portuguese were in Mahone Bay probably a century before Columbus "discovered" the Dominican Islands. No revelations there.


But still no Templars.

 

[treasure1822]

Let's take the stones one at a time...
"The Norumbega Vindland Stone"...or "Sigurd Stone" put into place to commemorate great deeds by families...Sigurd of Norse legend defeating Fafnir the dragon who guarded a treasure of gold. The one problem with this stone is there is no family name or mention of great deed. To read that stone you have to face Mohone Bay. What if the person who requested it was following in his ancestor foot steps. As I said in the "Feudal Right and Odal wrong, A memorial to Orkney", SinClair was said to have been retracing his Ancestors foot step...So why not leave a marker of his ancestors (the Vikings).

 

[treasure1822]

Lets try the "Overton Stone"



I don't see any "Runic Symbols", what is Clear is the Templar Cross" within the Circle and the 4 points of the compass represented by points...In Native American symbols the "Circle divided by cross lines" represents the earth. They belived the Eagle Feather and Tobacco was a gift from the god. The crescent noon is one of eight stages of the moon happening every 3 to 4 day, and it is all in the northeastern quadrant.

 

[ECS]

You seem to think that everything had to be documented.
Why do you think there is very little known about the Templar Knight's after they escaped France...
Could it be they just didn't "Document" their movements...

Could it be that absolutely nothing happened to be documented?
All that alleged activity after the "great escape from France" with that many Knights, an evidence trail would exist, just the lore that has been created perpetrated in recent years- long time after these alleged escape events.
Do you really believe that this mass exodus of Templar Knights and where they went could be totally unnoticed and unrecorded by everyone during that time period and remain unknown until discovered by these quasi historians?
"Two can keep a secret if one is dead"